I've just bought some poverty Pork…

[ATM]

Skyedriver said:

ATM said:

I bought an early 996 because these engines are less likely to bore score. Most people here can agree on that. It might only be 3.4 litres but the early cars are the simplest and also the lightest. So I still believe the early 996 is a good choice.

The other option is buying a car with Hartech work already done. These do pop up from time to time but prices can be high as the market seems to be waking up to the benefits.

Thanks, actually a 996 was my initial search and would suit me better with the rear perches however a gentleman of this parish has suggested a Boxster as a TVR replacement a number of times, the one I spotted was in the north of England and so easier to get to, a colour I prefer and sounded like a genuine sale rather than a quick flip. Early 996 - what sort of age are we looking at please?

I also have an early Boxster, it's a 2000 model. They are good little cars and cheap too. Again with any Porsche purchase of this era your risks are a long list of bits and pieces which might or could need sorting if you want to enjoy these cars at their best. But you can feel better about the lower risk from bore scoring. The other option is the gen 2 engine Boxster which means 2009 onwards. These basically do not bore score at all. The smallest 2.9 is reasonably punchy and has about the same power as the first 3.2 Boxster S. So you have options. If you want an early 996 then this means 1996 onwards I believe although I've only ever seen 1997 cars. I'm not sure when Porsche stopped using the better piston coating but it could be around 1999 or 2000. You need to buy the earlier cars ideally. My 1998 car has no side air bags and it is cable throttle. Don't get too hung up on the details - unless you really want to - but just know that a 1997 car will be lighter than a 2000 car like for like. Cost of ownership is probably the same which ever car you choose so once you get over the purchase price all the servicing and parts are pretty much the same. Although some Boxster specific parts are cheaper second hand like gearboxes.

[J Chitty]

My 2006 Cayman S cracked a cylinder and got a hartech repair, cylinder support rings and the modified water ways but I could never have faith in the car after that.
Never had a problem but always the sour feelings.
I fitted a centre radiator kit which is quite straight forward to do and also the front solid brake lines which I’d not attack again given the choice.
Hope the car has a happy future with an owner who doesn’t worry and drives.
I had it 15 years and the difference between that and the 718 GT4 are marked.
Steering not as communicative but less fatiguing on longer journeys, much lighter clutch and a huge uplift in power. Point to point on the public road though there’s not a huge amount in it yet but I haven’t run in so more GGs to exploit ))

[barryrs]

shalmaneser said:

Unless you've accidentally bought an x51 in which case lucky you!

No such luck; it’s been on for some time though.

[youngsyr]

barryrs said:

shalmaneser said:

Unless you've accidentally bought an x51 in which case lucky you!

No such luck; it’s been on for some time though.

Is it a tiptronic - these all have the 3rd radiator too, I believe.

[Skyedriver]

Why was the 3.4 engine not used in the Boxster until much later than 1996 when the 996 had it. Was that just so the Boxster didn't overshadow the 911? I assume it's the same basic motor.

[ATM]

Skyedriver said:

Why was the 3.4 engine not used in the Boxster until much later than 1996 when the 996 had it. Was that just so the Boxster didn't overshadow the 911? I assume it's the same basic motor.

When the Boxster was first launched it only had the 2.5 but yes basically the same motor. The Boxster saved Porsche from financial ruin. Quite a few of the Yanks swapped the 3.4 into the very early Boxsters.

[Fast Bug]

I seem to remember reading the 996 was originally meant to have a 3.2 engine, but it didn't produce enough power. I assume that engine went in to the Boxster S?

[barryrs]

youngsyr said:

barryrs said:

shalmaneser said:

Unless you've accidentally bought an x51 in which case lucky you!

No such luck; it’s been on for some time though.

Is it a tiptronic - these all have the 3rd radiator too, I believe.

Mine is indeed a tip.

[ATM]

barryrs said:

youngsyr said:

barryrs said:

shalmaneser said:

Unless you've accidentally bought an x51 in which case lucky you!

No such luck; it’s been on for some time though.

Is it a tiptronic - these all have the 3rd radiator too, I believe.

Mine is indeed a tip.

Ah ha

[shalmaneser]

Skyedriver said:

Why was the 3.4 engine not used in the Boxster until much later than 1996 when the 996 had it. Was that just so the Boxster didn't overshadow the 911? I assume it's the same basic motor.

The 3.4 motor from the 996 was never fitted to the 986, the later 3.4's had the same displacement but were quite different really, two stage variocam for a start. The early 3.4 is quite a basic engine really.

[edc]

The Boxster has always had the smaller or lower output engines compared to the 911.

[Speedgelb]

F6C said:

Speedgelb said:

As such, all smaller Cayster engines - 2.5, 2.7, 3.2 - don't bore score. They all have ferrous coated pistons, and sufficient cylinder wall thickness that this isn't an issue.

<snip>

2.5, 2.7 and 3.2 l engines do not bore score.

To throw that on its head, when was the last time you heard of a bore scored 2.5, 2.7, or 3.2? You'll of course get the odd outlier, but I do not recall seeing a single documented case on UK forums in the last 6 years or thereabouts.

Strictly speaking, the 2.7 was produced with the plastic coating and you do get the odd one that scores. It's not something I'd personally be worried about with a 2.7, though.

Do you have anything to back that up? Genuinely interested.

The info I have suggests 2.5, 2.7, 3.2 and (early) 3.4 M96 had the same (Ferrous) piston coating. Quote: "Later 996 3.4 engines had KS or Mahle pistons with a different piston coating" - this was mentioned in the same context as the 2.5 - 3.4 M96 engines described above.

Really, you can get bore scoring in any engine. Even the 9A1s. Doesn't mean there's a fundamental flaw in them, unlike the 997.1 non-Mezger engines and the M97 3.4. It's a non-issue in any of the 986 engines for the purposes of this discussion.

Fast Bug said:

I seem to remember reading the 996 was originally meant to have a 3.2 engine, but it didn't produce enough power. I assume that engine went in to the Boxster S?

The 3.2 / 3.4 M96 engines are very similar. With the 996 being available before the 986 S, you'd think the 3.4 was developed first?

The 3.4 has ~6% more capacity than the 3.2, but produces 20% more power. Mainly due to Porsche crippling the 3.2 engine at the intake - IE airbox (986 airbox is actually a bottleneck at stock 3.2 power),TB ; exhaust, and mapping. The heads are very similar (if not the same). The intake manifolds are slightly different, but I think this may be due to packaging (which supports the theory that the 3.4 was developed first) - the intake manifold on the 3.4 is slightly taller than the 3.2, and doesn't fit without minor tweaks in a 986.

With decent manifolds and upgrades on the intake side, and of course a remap, a 3.2 will develop over 280hp - as evidenced by the early 987, which uses the same basic engine as found in the 986.2S.

A friend with a fettled 3.2 managed to pull away from a stock 996 3.4 on the autobahn, much to the disbelief of the 996 pilot




BTW: does anybody else hear hooves, and see antlers? If you know, you know

Edited by Speedgelb on Thursday 9th December 11:40

[ATM]

Porsche nerds

My friend has a 996.2 and he is hearing a slight knock from the front suspension. I'm sure I read somewhere - probably on here - that this is usually tuning forks right?

[shalmaneser]

ATM said:

Porsche nerds

My friend has a 996.2 and he is hearing a slight knock from the front suspension. I'm sure I read somewhere - probably on here - that this is usually tuning forks right?

Or just boring old droplinks

[ferrisbueller]

Cmoose is back with a new login, then?

[delays]

ATM said:

When the Boxster was first launched it only had the 2.5 but yes basically the same motor. The Boxster saved Porsche from financial ruin. Quite a few of the Yanks swapped the 3.4 into the very early Boxsters.

996 engine into 986 is something I often think about. I’m assuming cost/benefit doesn’t stack?

[ATM]

delays said:

ATM said:

When the Boxster was first launched it only had the 2.5 but yes basically the same motor. The Boxster saved Porsche from financial ruin. Quite a few of the Yanks swapped the 3.4 into the very early Boxsters.

996 engine into 986 is something I often think about. I’m assuming cost/benefit doesn’t stack?

Cost benefit is basically irrelevant if you want more power. But not sure what you're asking.

The different generations do allow swap ability. Ruf used to sell a 986 3.4 in the early days when the 996 had a 3.4 and then started selling a 986 3.6 when the 911 changed to using the 3.6 litre engine. So I believe you can just swap them over relatively easily. The external dimensions are basically the same. By using a similar generation you have all the same wiring connections. Inlet and outlet manifolds do differ so generally you'll need to use the car specific outlet manifold but you can make the engine specific inlet manifold work. But I'm no expert. I just know I dreamed about this a lot when I had my first Boxster in 2004.

Don't forget that if you're upgrading a Boxster with a 996 engine then you're probably better off starting with the Boxster S because it has the same brakes as a 996 and it has a similar ratio gearbox. However some people prefer to use the smaller engine Boxster 5 speed gearbox because they are a bit lighter and very cheap on the second hand market. The lower ratios also make the car quicker but if you have a more power from say a larger engine then lower ratios can be a disadvantage.

The original 2.5 Boxster 5 speed upgraded to 3.4 was very popular in the states. And considering the 2.5 only had 200 bhp where as the 3.4 has 300 you can see why.

Engine swaps can also work right up to the 981 which can take the 3.8 from the 991. There was a guy on here who had one built and used it a lot for track days.

Of course the other option is to just pay someone like Hartexh to build you an enlarged engine. I think they offer up to 3.9 litre but generally these only get fitted to the 996 gen 2.

There is a 996 which has been fitted with the later 3.8 engine from a 991 but according to the info I read this was too complicated to be economical or even repeatable which is a shame.

We also have guy on here who has fitted the Audi v6 twin turbo engine into a Boxster. This started life as a 986 but then got upgraded to a 987.

[Speedgelb]

986 S with bolt on mods and a remap will get to within 10 / 15hp of 996.1 Carrera, so such an engine swap is lot of effort for little gain, particularly as these bolt ons will be required to let the Carrera motor make stock power - just look at the stock exhaust manifolds on a 986...

3.7 / 3.9 (using a 3.6 Carrera engine as the base) swap would be mega. Did Hartech say they were also working ona 4.1 conversion, using the 3.6 / 3.8 M97 engine as a base?

[ATM]

There doesn't seem to be many modded 986 knocking about. Not with enlarged engines. I have found a 986 owner claiming to have a 3.7 with fruity cams. That does sound interesting. He also has the RTS and hardtop like mine. Maybe we can be friends.

[ooid]

Skyedriver said:

Wasn't sure where to post this but here's as good as any. Not exactly poverty I guess (not to me anyway) but here goes

I shouldn't be looking, I've a car to sell first really (TVR please don't tell them I'm here) but I noticed a Boxster 3.4S advertised yesterday on a well known internet auction site,

Keep the TVR and get the cleanest and the most looked after boxster (986) you can afford, except 3.4 engine.

2.5, 2.7, 3.2 all great imho, should not be a massive issue.

I genuinely would not move from TVR to early water cooled porsche as a direct change.